The invention described herein was made in the course of work under Grant Nos. N43-AI-5-2603 and 1 R43-AI/CA24069-01-SSS from the National Institute of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and under contract No. DAMD17-87-C-7046 from the Department of the Army. The U.S. Government has certain rights in this invention.
Within this application several publications are referenced by Arabic numerals within parentheses. Full citations for these references may be found at the end of the specification immediately preceding the claims. The disclosures of these publications in their entirety are hereby incorporated by reference into this application in order to more fully describe the state of the art to which this invention pertains.
Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) belongs to the animal herpesvirus group. The cytomegaloviruses occupy a special subfamily of the Herpesviridae called the Betaherpesvirinae. Viruses belonging to this group exhibit narrow host range, long duration of the replication cycle with slowly progressing lytic foci in cell culture, and frequently show enlarged cells (cytomegalia) both in vitro and in vivo. The viruses also have a genomic organization (an arrangement of genes) which is distinct from other herpesvirus groups. These characteristics show that cytomegaloviruses are distinct from herpesviruses in other subfamilies (1). Accordingly, what is known and described in the prior art regarding other herpesvirus subfamilies does not pertain a priori to members of the cytomegalovirus subfamily.
HCMV occurs widely in the human population, e.g., approximately 60% of humans have serological evidence of infection by HCMV by adulthood. The infections occur through direct transmission by contact, often through mother's milk. The infection is usually asymptomatic, and HCMV has a reputation for being a very benign pathogen. Serious complications arise in two instances. Fetuses that are infected in utero by passage of HCMV from the mother (who herself is suffering a primary infection) can become infected and be born with "cytomegalic inclusion" disease. This is a serious HCMV infection, indicated by the excretion of large amounts of HCMV in the urine, and often leads to congenital defects involving sensorineural loss, e.g., hearing or psychomotor development, and retardation. The other instance involves any immunosuppressed individual, e.g., someone on immunosuppresive drugs, an individual suffering a congenital immunodeficiency, or an individual suffering an acquired immunodeficiency, e.g., AIDS. Because of the widespread presence of HCMV, these individuals frequently suffer from a generalized HCMV infection which they are unable to combat immunologically. These two instances of HCMV diseases contribute a relatively large disease burden for which there is little or no therapy (2).
Two different HCMV strains have been tested as vaccines. The first test employed the AD-169 strain of HCMV given to healthy volunteers as described in (3). The test was successful with transient development of complement-fixing antibodies and little untoward side effects except a delayed local reaction at the site of injection. The virus was again tested by another group who confirmed the previous results and showed that immunological responses were maintained for at least one year (4). In an independent vaccine effort, the Towne strain of HCMV was grown in tissue culture for 125 passages (Towne-125) and tested as a candidate live virus vaccine (5). The results of the Towne-125 administration paralleled those of AD-169 administration; antibody responses were evident in healthy human volunteers, and a local delayed reaction occurred at the site of injection (6, 7). A prospective study was undertaken with the Towne-125 strain in patients with end-stage renal failure who were candidates for transplants and hence immunosuppressive therapy (8). All seronegative vaccinates developed antibody and none had adverse side-effects except for local reactions, and no vaccine-related problems were identified in the interval after transplantion. However six of the nine vaccinates did excrete HCMV in their urine after transplantation and immunosuppressive therapy, albeit this was wild type and not vaccine strain. Thus the vaccination did not protect fully, against infection or re-activation of HCMV, but statistically the patients were better off for having been vaccinated. In a direct safety comparison between the Towne-125 strain and a wild type Toledo-1 strain in healthy seronegative volunteers, the Toledo-1 strain was shown to induce laboratory abnormalities or mild mononucleosis only, while the Towne-125 strain showed no adverse effects except for delayed local reactions at the site of injection (9). These studies show that existing strains of HCMV have a high degree of safety, even in immunosuppressed patients, which may be improved by reducing the delayed reactions at the site of injection.
The present invention concerns the use of HCMV as a vector for the delivery of vaccine antigens and therapeutic agents to humans. The following properties of HCMV support this rationale: HCMV is ubiquitous in nature; HCMV has benign effects in healthy individuals; an HCMV strain exists which appears safe for immunocompromised individuals; and the target population for an HCMV-delivered therapeutic agent is likely to have been exposed to wild type HCMV and therefore should not have an increased risk burden from the vector. Accordingly an attenuated HCMV is an excellent candidate for a viral vector delivery system, having little intrinsic risk which must be balanced against the benefit contributed by the vector's vaccine or therapeutic properties.
The prior art for this invention stems first from the ability to clone and analyze DNA while in bacterial plasmids. The techniques that are available for the most part are detailed in Maniatis et al. (10). This publication teaches state of the art general recombinant DNA techniques.
Among the herpesviruses, only four herpesviruses (herpes simplex of humans, herpes saimiri of monkeys, pseudorabies virus and varicella-zoster virus) have been engineered to contain foreign DNA sequences previous to this disclosure. The earliest work on the genetic manipulation of herpes simplex involved the rescue of temperature sensitive mutants of the virus using purified restriction fragments of DNA (11). This work did not involve cloning of the DNA fragments nor the purposeful creation of deletions nor insertions of foreign DNA fragments into the viral genome. The first use of recombinant DNA to manipulate herpes simplex virus involved cloning a piece of DNA from the L-S junction region into the unique long region of the DNA, specifically into the thymidine kinase gene (12). This insert was not a foreign piece of DNA, rather it was a naturally-occurring piece of herpesviruses DNA that was duplicated at another place in the genome. This piece of DNA was not engineered to specifically express any protein, and thus it did not teach how to express protein in herpesviruses. The manipulation of herpes simplex next involved the creation of deletions in the virus genome by a combination of recombinant DNA and thymidine kinase selection. The first step was to make a specific deletion of the thymidine kinase gene (13). The next step involved the insertion of the thymidine kinase gene into the genome at a specific site, and then the thymidine kinase gene and the flanking DNA at the new site were deleted by a selection against thymidine kinase (14). In this manner herpes simplex alpha-22 gene has been deleted. (14). In the most recent refinement of this technique, a 15,000 bp sequence of DNA has been deleted f rom the internal repeat of herpes simplex virus (15).
The insertion of genes that encode protein into herpesviruses have involved a number of cases: the insertion of herpes simplex glycoprotein C back into a naturally occurring deletion mutant of this gene in herpes simplex virus (16); the insertion of glycoprotein D of herpes simplex type 2 into herpes simplex type 1 (17), again with no manipulation of promoter since the gene is not really "foreign"; the insertion of hepatitis B surface antigen into herpes simplex virus under the control of the herpes simplex ICP4 promoter (18); and the insertion of bovine growth hormone into herpes saimiri virus with an SV40 promoter that in fact didn't work in the system (an endogenous upstream promoter served to transcribe the gene) (19). Two additional cases of foreign genes (chicken ovalbumin gene and Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigen) have been inserted into herpes simplex virus (20), and glycoprotein X of pseudorabies virus has been inserted into herpes simplex virus (21).
More recently, the herpes simplex virus TK gene and the tissue plasminogen activator gene have been inserted into pseudorabies virus (PCT International Publication No. W087/00862), and an Epstein-Barr virus glycoprotein antigen has been inserted into varicella-zoster virus (22).
These examples of insertions of foreign genes into herpesviruses do not include an example from the cytomegalovirus subfamily. Thus they do not teach methods to genetically engineer cytomegaloviruses, i.e., where to make insertions and how to get expression.
The idea of using live viruses as delivery systems for antigens has a relatively long history going back to the first live vaccine. The antigens were not "foreign" but were natural components of the live vaccines. The use of viruses as a vector for the delivery of "foreign" antigen in the modern sense became obvious with the vaccinia virus recombinant studies. There vaccinia was the vector and various antigens from other diseases were the "foreign" antigens, and the vaccine was created by genetic engineering. While the concept became obvious with these disclosures, what was not obvious was the answer to a more practical question of which are the best candidate virus vectors. In answering this question, details of the pathogenicity of the virus, its site of replication, the kind of immune response it elicited, the potential for it to express foreign antigens, its suitability for genetic engineering, its probability of being licensed by the FDA, etc, are all factors in the selection. For example, a viral vector carrying a therapeutic agent needs to target the correct cell type to deliver the therapeutic agent. The prior art does not teach these utility questions.
Furthermore, the obvious use of vaccinia virus to carry foreign antigens does not extend to its use in the delivery of therapeutic agents. Moreover, the use of any herpesvirus as a vector for therapeutic agents has equally not been pursued in the prior art.
The prior art relating to the use of viruses as therapeutic vectors involves members of the retrovirus family. These viruses are distinctive because they integrate into the host cell genome during infection, and they can be engineered to deliver foreign genes that potentially could cure genetic diseases. This concept involving retroviruses cannot be extended to any other virus family by analogy because of the unique nature of the retrovirus replication cycle.
The nature of the therapeutic agent that is to be delivered by a viral vector of the present invention must be a biological molecule that is a by-product of cytomegalovirus replication. This limits the therapeutic agent in the first analysis to either DNA, RNA, or protein. There are examples of therapeutic agents from each of these classes of compounds in the form of anti-sense DNA, anti-sense RNA, interferon-inducing double stranded RNA, and numerous examples of protein therapeutics, from hormones, e.g., insulin, to lymphokines, e.g., interferons and interleukins, to natural opiates. The discovery of these therapeutic agents and the elucidation of their structure and function does not make obvious the ability to use them in a viral vector delivery system.